For the second consecutive day, the Supreme Court on 13 August, heard arguments of petitioners in the pleas challenging the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar.
The matter was being heard by bench of Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi. This comes a day after prominent senior Advocates such as Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Kapil Sabil, and Prashant Bhushan called out the massive vote deletion and discrepancies in the EC's SIR process.
It must be noted that just three days ago, the ECI informed the apex court that it is not obligated under the applicable Rules to publish a separate list of persons who have been deleted from the draft roll.
On 13 August, appearing for the petitioners again, Advocate Singhvi pointed out that in cases when there's a doubt regarding citizenship, the ERO (Electoral Registration Officer) may consult relevant authorities, including the MHA before making a decision. Adding that EC swears by the Lal Babu Hussein case and must adhere to precedent set by the same.
ECI must follow procedure, its own procedure. This same thing happened in 2004. Arunachal and Maharashtra were exempted, while they went on for other states, because elections were round the corner. This (Bihar SIR) is the one time wonder when ECI is not following its own rules! You can't have a time-squeeze for such an important activity. We are seeking a stay.Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi in SC, as per LiveLaw